« Dissenting View | Main | Debate III »
October 13, 2004
Where I'm headed
I made a list tonight of the topics I would like to cover over the next three weeks.
- A series on how pollsters define and identify likely voters
- Wireless phones
- Response rates
- The challenge of new registrants
- Nightly tracking polls
- Automated (IVR) polls
- Internet Polls
- Electoral College Projections
- Nader's vote
- Exit polls
This list is ambitious given the calendar. Many of you have sent other excellent questions, but I will try hard to cover as man of the topics on this list as possible. I may also post occasionally with my thoughts about where the presidential race stands, but you have many sources of analysis on that front.
For tonight, I'm up watching debate coverage. Just as I typed that last sentence, Larry King just asked Candy Crowley to explain how pollsters decide who a likely voter is, and asked Perry Bacon whether we poll people with cell phones. I think that's a sign...
Related Entries - MP Housekeeping
Posted by Mark Blumenthal on October 13, 2004 at 11:45 PM in MP Housekeeping | Permalink
Comments
I'd be interested in a "Day in the Life of the Pollster" blog once in a while. Meaning, polling aside, what is it like to be a pollster in a campaign. What are the tensions, pecking order, pulls and pushes. What's the typical day look like. Do most pollsters work from standard core surveys that they cart from campaign to campaign. In short, what are the logistics of polling in a campaign, from question generation to conducting surveys, analysis and how all of those pieces are operationalized in the field. Maybe a good serial blog once the election is over. As always, keep up the great work and thanks!!
Posted by: Rory | Oct 14, 2004 12:09:46 AM
Pollsters also don't call the military personnel. There are 1.5 million of them, many of them overseas and on bases in the US. Most don't have phones where pollsters can reach them. These are all left out.
Posted by: Cableguy | Oct 14, 2004 2:30:02 AM
It might be interesting to discuss how to evaluate pollsters. I.e., after the election, is there a way of telling which pollsters were more accurate or "fairer" or had a better methodology overall?
Posted by: Alok | Oct 14, 2004 2:21:05 PM
The "proof of the pudding" is how well a pollster's final pre-election poll matches the actual results. Here is an historical chart from 1936-2000:
http://www.ncpp.org/1936-2000.htm
Posted by: Alan R. | Oct 14, 2004 10:06:33 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
